Learn Writing with Uncle Jim, Volume 1

Status
Not open for further replies.

reph

Re: Cosmic Writer

Crusader, taking a purely commercial perspective for a moment, those things do matter to acquisitions editors.
 

Crusader

Re:

reph, do you realize what i'm apparently saying? i'm apparently saying that the point of focus should be on the "things that matter to acquisitions editors." That is apparently what i'm saying. Apparently.
 

maestrowork

Re: weird thread

Well, we can certainly play that, too, by focusing on "what matters." Probably things like:

1) how to create suspense or interest
2) how to effectively create a page-turner
3) what makes a character come to life?

As Uncle Jim asked at the end of "The Street Lawyer" analysis: A show of hands, who wants to find out what happens next?
 

maestrowork

Re: Re:

Acquisition editors care about it all, and not just "does the story have enough suspense." Grammar, style, mechanics, dialogue, etc. etc. etc. are all important to the editors. That's why I don't see how "well, it keeps me interested" is going to be good enough, unless you're one of those established writers who could write crap and people would still buy their books...
 

Crusader

Re: Re:

@maestrowork:
Well, we can certainly play that, too, by focusing on "what matters." Probably things like:

1) how to create suspense or interest
2) how to effectively create a page-turner
3) what makes a character come to life?

* * *

Acquisition editors care about it all, and not just "does the story have enough suspense."...


Mm, good enough summary for me. i commend you for not taking my 'devil's advocate' act too seriously, yet still taking it seriously (if that makes sense). And i'm sure the actual speaker meant well, it was just worded in an off-putting way.

Beyond all that, i have read elsewhere that the job of the editor is comparable to the job of representatives and executives in government, insofar as the editor is indirectly entrusted by the people to select the books that will appeal to the people. So by that argument, what works for the editor, works for the people. [Edit: And so what we non-editors say, is therefore irrelevant.]

[shrugs] Dunno. It's interesting to debate, however.
 

detante

Re: Re:

. . . I don't see how "well, it keeps me interested" is going to be good enough, unless you're one of those established writers who could write crap and people would still buy their books...

I believe Grisham, Patterson & Holt's pieces could fall into this catagory. But Weber's piece was from one of his earlier books. Did he have enough of a following at that time?
 

maestrowork

Re: weird thread

That's a good question, and one to ponder how one (an unknown author) gets published. I haven't read the rest of Weber's book so perhaps it's actually a wonderful read. I just don't know, but I wasn't impressed with the first few pages, that's for sure.
 

detante

Re: weird thread

I'm a slave to the genre, so I probably would have read the first two or three chapters before deciding if Weber was worth reading. Same goes for the uncredited work.

I found Grisham interesting. Not interesting enough to run out and purchase, but if I had book in hand, I would read more.

Holt and Patterson didn't hold my interest, though. I doubt I'd read either book unless I was snowed in with nothing else to do.
 

reph

Re: Re:

reph, do you realize what i'm apparently saying?

Apparently not. You appeared to say that the things we were discussing, such as grammar and character depth, don't matter to publishability. But that was just an appearance.
 

Writing Again

How do you get published the first time?

Acquisition editors care about it all, and not just "does the story have enough suspense." Grammar, style, mechanics, dialog, etc. etc. etc. are all important to the editors. That's why I don't see how "well, it keeps me interested" is going to be good enough, unless you're one of those established writers who could write crap and people would still buy their books...

First you need to realize that no matter how badly you write, or have ever written -- There is someone out there who has written far worse -- And has submitted it.

Everyone who contributes to this forum, and I do mean everyone, comes here with the realization that no matter how well or how poorly they write they can learn to do better, they can improve.

There are a lot of people out there who are incapable of realizing they do not write better than Stephen King, or realizing they cannot write as well as Shakespeare. When they are rejected they do not ask, "What did I do wrong?" or "How can I improve?": Then curse the editors as fools and idiots who did not understand them.

When I was young I complained that it was unfair that a new writer had to write better than the average selling writer. An editor explained it to me simply, "Once you start selling, once you start hitting deadlines, your quality of writing will go down. It is inevitable. If your first novel is not above the average then your future novels will be below the average."

Established writers don't so much "get by with writing crap" as they are pushed into it. Every contract I ever signed committed me to have a new novel written within a year. Nothing obligated the publisher to buy it.

So in your first novel you need to aim for the highest quality you can possibly achieve.

Next you have to realize that what the acquisitions editor has to choose from is what they have in front of them. They have so many slots to fill. They will select the very best to fill them.

Also remember there are many aspects to writing a good novel. Most good writers maximize their assets and minimize their liabilities. If you are tops at narrative and lousy at dialog then don't write dialog driven stories.


This is part of the crap shoot. If you submit at the same time as the next Stephen King, Gresham, etc are submitting your ms will fall lower down the pile. If you happen to submit when the worst of the worst are dumping garbage your ms will rise higher in the pile.

So what is the acquisitions editor looking for now?

The answer is something that can be sold: Something that holds the editor's interest.

So what you need to do is to write a story that is above the average published story that is out there, that is an interesting story in and of itself, as well written as you can make it, then hope for the best.
 

Writing Again

How important is grammar?

A lot of people believe that I denigrate grammar. I do not. What I do believe is that many writers place far too little emphasis on the craft of telling a good story.

They do not understand plot, structure, conflict, or character; they do not concern themselves with goals, either inner goals or outer goals nor how to create opposition to those goals; they often ignore the inner life of their characters in spite of the fact this is what a novel does best; They seldom concern themselves with the interactions of their characters with each other or with the environment.

The story is what drives the novel the way an engine drives a car. How the story is told is equivalent to the body style and grammar is equivalent to the paint job. A car without decent style will not be appealing and one with no paint is going to look pretty bad, but without an engine it simply is not going any place at all.
 

HConn

Re: Re:

If stilted dialogue, confusing narratives, cliches, verb tense changes, poor character development, etc. don't matter much, may I ask, what matters to you?

A good story.

Why bother being a writer if we find those things "don't matter"?

Thanks for cutting off the last two words of my sentence to change the meaning. :rolleyes

Crusader, now you're posting out-of-context exerpts from my reply to your PM? That's dirty pool. And if you think anything I've said implies I "know best what is publishable" then you haven't been paying attention.

1) how to create suspense or interest
2) how to effectively create a page-turner
3) what makes a character come to life?

:D

I'd drive a car without paint. It's probably the only kind I could afford.
 

sc211

Re: How do you get published the first time?

"What I do believe is that many writers place far too little emphasis on the craft of telling a good story."

I had this illness once, and I got it from school, where you're always writing with someone looking over your shoulder, ready to point out the misplaced comma and misspelled word. Where you're taught how to dissect a story - not how to bring one to life.

It wasn't until I got into music that I realized you had to let the first draft sing, just jam it out and capture the emotion of it all, and only then go back and refine it. To make it leaner while keeping its pulse.

As they say in the studios, "Lay it down dirty and play it back clean."
 

Velleity

First Two Pages

I've been enjoying the first-two-pages exercises myself. I wouldn't mind seeing a thread devoted to it.

What I've been getting out of it how some of these openings set up promises for the rest of the book. The two Grisham openers do this, as does the Holt. On the other hand, Weber's too tangled up in backstory infodump to get any other information across, and as for the Patterson -- I'll just pretend I never read that....

The latest opener sets up promises in its prologue, all right -- this is going to be a novel of decadence, demons, and madness. But the first chapter immediately starts delivering on those promises without making any new ones. By the end of page 2 I'm wondering if there's going to be anything to this book besides horror and insanity. It's not a failed opening by any stretch, but it's going too far too quickly.

So, how about that first-two-pages thread? I promise I'll contribute an opening gambit or two.
 

Writing Again

The proportion of it all.

If stilted dialog, confusing narratives, cliches, verb tense changes, poor character development, etc. don't matter much, may I ask, what matters to you?

While no novel could survive all of that many novels could survive some of it and I think most do to some degree.

The James Bond concept of fleshing a character out by calling her P#$$y Galore or him Jaws rings a bit cartoony; shades of Dick Tracy.

I would probably place confusing narrative as a worse sin than stilted dialog, unless there was a lot of dialog. Cliches are probably the easiest to overcome; while they do not brighten up a narrative they do tend to disappear in the woodwork.

I use to write good dialog by a sort of instinct. For some reason this no longer happens and I have to spruce it up on a pass through all of its own. If I'm ever in a real hurry to meet a deadline I'm sure this is an area that will suffer.

While I would say these things do matter, and matter a lot, I would also say that we are all human, everyone is going to miss something once in a while; I would also say that a lot of really good writers seem to be incapable of mastering certain fundamentals -- Such as (not) writing stilted dialog.

How much should we rail against the sloppy writing of published authors?

Think about it this way: If all published writers wrote perfectly it would be even harder to break in than it already is because then we would have to writer perfectly as well.

Remember that the object is to produce something better than the average published novel. As writers we want our antagonist to be tough, but we don't want him so tough he is unbeatable.
 

drgnlvrljh

Bad writing

I once read a book by a sci-fi author, that was horrible. It was incredibly flat, all the way through. I genuinely wondred how he managed to get published. But he did, frequently, by the number of books he had on the shelves. I honestly thought that the one book might be a fluke. So I attempted to read another one by him. It was the same way, flat story, flat characters, flat, flat, flat. I never finished that book.

But then I started thinking seriously about my own writing, and came to the conclusion that maybe I had a chance, considering. I figured this guy must have just followed the "rules" when he submitted, and if he can get published, so can I.

Of course, that doesn't mean I'm going to send off crap that has perfect margins, font, and spelling.

But it does make me wonder, now that I know more....how -did- this guy get published? And how does he (did he? Not sure if he's still alive, even) consistantly get good reviews on his work?
 

maestrowork

Re: Re:

I must disagree, HConn. Simply "a good story" is not enough. I've seen too many "good stories" go to waste because of poor execution. Execution is just as important as the story itself, and execution includes gramma, style, structure, dialogue, etc. At least for me, "story" is not everything. If the author cannot entrance me with good execution, to put me right inside the story and give me a ride, it doesn't matter if the story is a good one -- I wouldn't know because I wouldn't be able to finish it.

Perhaps that's just me. But perhaps by "good story" you actually meant the "execution" of a good story. Then, I guess we are in agreement. Otherwise, how would you explain why so many "good stories" get stuck in slush (as Uncle Jim told us, over 90% of mss. stay in the pile)? Why we consider someone a good writer (e.g. Grisham) instead of a bad one?

I think some of these analysis may answer the question. The things to watch out for if you want to write publishable novels. Otherwise, why are we even reading Uncle Jim's thread?


p.s. I'm also bothered by your comment that "some of us think we know better but we don't." Now, how did you come to that conclusion?
 

reph

Re: First Two Pages

I once read a book by a sci-fi author, that was horrible.

How old was it? During the early decades after SF got rolling, the storytelling standards were low.
 

drgnlvrljh

Re: First Two Pages

How old was it? During the early decades after SF got rolling, the storytelling standards were low.

Not sure. It was by Ben Bova, if that's any help. I haven't read anything by him in a long time. I didn't think it was too old, though. I've read some old 40's sci-fi and stuff, and I can excuse it, because it was the "early days". But for some reason, I couldn't excuse this stuff. I mean, it just seemed even worse than 40's sci fi (ie; green amazon women from mars stuff)
 

shaynexus

Another prologue to crit if you're not saded

A CAST OF CARICATURES
PROLOGUE
“All the world’s a stage / And all the men and women merely players…” As You Like It, Act 11 / Scene VII William Shakespeare.

And in that vein, dear reader, allow me to pique your interest in this troupe’s imminent ‘R-rated performance’ by prefacing it with a six-year-old news item that ran in The Fresno Bee on December 30 as Joel Wassermann’s column:

(Remainder of post can be found in the Share Your Work board.)
 

reph

Re: Re:

With the usual disclaimer about humble opinions, I say the preceding post belongs on Share Your Work. It's too long for the exercise we've been doing here.
 

HConn

Re: First Two Pages

I don't get a lot of free time on Mondays, so I can't really take part in the discussion right now.

But I would like to apologize to anyone offended by the tone of my posts.
 

maestrowork

Re: First Two Pages

I agree, Reph. I've placed it in SYW and please feel free to do your exercise/analysis there:

p197.ezboard.com/fabsolut...=571.topic

(Remember, no critting grammar, punctuations, word choices, etc. Strickly analyze what the author tries to achieve and "does it work" for you as a reader...)
 

reph

Re: Another prologue to crit if you're not saded

Thanks, Maestro, but it's still here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.